|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 5, 2017 13:23:16 GMT -5
Is it easier being white in Africa? – A Martin et al & B. Henn 2017
Ancient Africa that is.
I mentioned in another thread that “white people” first appeared it south Africa. Weeellll….!!!
And as I said before that is why I like Henn. She is fighting back. Looking at her videos on YouTube you know, she is struggling to head off the racist media and academics. She gets irate by the stupid questions posed to her. I feel you babe. She faces challenges but it took strength and fortitude to publish this paper. Sarah Tishkoff should take a few lessons from her when she co-wrote that wishy washy paper on white skin originating in Africa. Speaking from both sides of her mouth. Here Henn is also threading water. Trying to keep her head above water. Keep her funding coming in. A delicate line.. In her conclusion she gave three options but we know which one she believes based on the inference and data she provided. Excellent piece of work Brenna.
----------------- Quotes from : An Unexpectedly Complex Architecture for Skin Pigmentation in Africans - Alicia R. Martin and Brenna Henn and C. Bustamante
Despite Africa being home to the greatest range of pigmentation globally, remarkably few genetic studies of pigmentation have been published to date in continental Africans (Crawford et al., 2017; Jablonski and Chaplin, 2014; Relethford, 2000
Smaller effects, including associations in/near MC1R, TYR, IRF4, and ASIP, contribute to the relatively narrow variation within Europeans (Sulem et al., 2007, 2008). Light skin pigmentation in Eurasians arose through both convergent evolution (e.g., rs1800414 in OCA2 in East Asians) and similar selective sweeps (e.g., KITLG) (Miller et al., 2007; Yang et al., 2016). Because African populations have been under-studied, the genetic architecture and higher variability of skin pigmentation is poorly understood.
For example, a previous study in recently admixed Cape Verdeans with European and West African ancestors showed that ***only 4 loci explain 35% of the variation in skin pigmentation*** (Beleza et al., 2013b). In contrast, complex traits Xyyman comment: in other words they are not sure why Cape Verdeans are so light. Admixture with Europeans cannot explain it. Cape Verdeans also carry R1b. Can they explain it?
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 5, 2017 13:41:35 GMT -5
Previous work points to southern Africa as the point of origin for modern humans (Henn et al., 2011; Tishkoff et al., 2009), but it is unknown whether moderate to light skin pigmentation in the different KhoeSan populations is an example of convergent evolution with northern Europeans and Asians or reflects the ***ancestral**** human phenotype. Previous studies have noted different pigmentation allele frequencies between the
We quantitatively phenotyped baseline skin color in 479 individuals (277 zKhomani, 202 Nama; Figure S1 and Table S4) via narrow- band reflectometry to measure hemoglobin and melanin of both the left and right upper inner arms (STAR Methods), with
We assessed these ancestry proportions using ****unsupervised ****allele frequency clustering with ADMIXTURE, as well as principal components analysis (PCA; STAR Methods). At k = 3 ancestry components, we observe distinct clustering between Europeans, Bantu-speaking and West African populations, and KhoeSan populations; both the Nama and the zKhomani have 75%–80% KhoeSan-specific ancestry. For k = 7, which gives most stable ancestry estimates
Consistent with this result, we observe substantial skin pigmentation variation among ***related*** individuals, which, coupled with high heritability (see below), suggests a role for large effect sizes of alleles contributing to pigmentation. Xyyman comment: - same mommy and same daddy. Different skin shade?
We confirm its elevated allele frequency on KhoeSan haplotypes (65%) but do not find an association with skin pigmentation (p = 0.53). Variants in OCA2 explain most of the variation in human eye color (Duffy et al., 2007), and rs1800404 was later significantly associated with this phenotype (Eriksson et al., 2010); Khomani and Nama individuals notably have heterogeneous eye color, with a range of ****brown, hazel, and green eyes. ***We identified a missense mutation in OCA2 (rs1800417, not significant with skin pigmentation: p = 0.87) with a derived allele (G) frequency of 0.32 in the KhoeSan (Table S6) that is at low frequency in all other populations surveyed (global allele frequency = 0.016 in 1000 Genomes and 0.0058 in the Exome Aggregation Consortium [ExAC]). Xyyman comment: Bantus with Blue Eyes? So South Africans do have light eyes but it may be due to different genes compared to some Europeans?
Pigmentation than expected by chance in the resequencing regions (Figure 5A). The strongest signal comes from SNPsin SLC24A5, eight of which are all in high pairwise LD (R2 > 0.6) on a high-frequency haplotype (Figure 5B). We identify significant associations between lighter skin and derived SLC24A5 SNPs, including the putatively causal p.Thr111Ala rs1426654 allele (b = 3.58 on M index scale, p = 9.8e-9), which has previously been associated with skin pigmentation in Eurasians. The most strongly associated SNP (rs2555364, b = 3.58 on M index scale, p = 6.7e 9) is tightly linked with rs1426654 (LD R2 = 0.81). These variants are strongly differentiated between Europeans and Africans, with rs1426654 having derived allele frequencies of 99.7% versus 5.5% in 1000 Genomes (***excluding*** ASW and ACB populations with recent European admixture), respectively. The derived allele of rs1426654 has previously been observed in the Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP) Juj’hoansi San samples, which have ****no detectable *****recent European admixture (Norton et al., 2007), at 7% frequency. The frequency of the derived rs1426654 allele is 40% in the combined Nama and zKhomani dataset, which is significantly greater than expected from 11% European admixture alone (binomial test p = 7.8e 52, Table S6 and STAR Methods). Xyyman comment: So the light skin of South Africans is NOT due to European admixture. The follow up questions is The Europeans get it from South Africans/ It is the same derived gene. Did the mutation occur twice?
We also identify a low frequency association (rs34803545, p = 3.7e-4) 600 kb upstream of TYRP1. This variant is perfectly linked with multiple conserved variants, one of which exhibits enhancer acti xyyman comment: so TYRP1 makes the person MORE white
However, populations living in continental Africa, where humans have the greatest genetic diversity and pigmentation variability, have been largely ignored in genetic studies with quantitative phenotypes. We investigated the genetic architecture of pigmentation in two KhoeSan populations: the zKhomani San and Nama,
pigmentation. The strongest association is in SLC24A5, which is a well-known pigmentation gene (Lamason et al., 2005) and is among the most differentiated regions of the genome between European and African populations—indicative of strong positive selection in northern Europeans (Sturm and Duffy, 2012). We find that derived variants in SLC24A5, including missense mutations that influence skin and eye pigmentation (Table 2), are at high frequency in the KhoeSan. Notably, these variants are segregating at higher frequency than expected by recent European admixture alone. Three possible evolutionary scenarios that may explain these elevated
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 5, 2017 13:52:14 GMT -5
The Polygenic Architecture of Pigmentation in Africa We assessed the heritability of baseline skin pigmentation and find that it is virtually completely heritable in KhoeSan populations populations. In contrast, tanning status is primarily environmental, with heritability estimates which are not significantly different from zero. In European populations, predictive models based on only 9 SNPs capture up to 16% of the variance in skin pigmentation (Liu et al., 2015), highlighting its relative simplicity. We applied a predictive model based on these SNPs to the Nama and zKhomani San populations, and find no significant association between predicted skin color and spectrophotometrically measured skin M index, showing that this estimation fails to capture the genetic variation driving the phenotype in the KhoeSan. Given the large effect sizes and high fraction of variation explained in Eurasian populations, we asked whether and how much of the phenotypic variation can be explained by previously identified genes. All gene sets, including previously associated loci, canonical pigmentation genes, and the most significantly associated variants in this study, explained a small fraction of the phenotypic variance (s2 GS1 = 0.08, s2 GS2 = 0.09, s2 GS3 = 0.23, respectively). Xyyman comment: Being white is easy but not in Africa. Being black takes a lot more effort…or genes!!
As expected from previous work (Martin et al., 2017), our results indicate that genetic ***risk prediction*** is strongly affected by population structure. Most of the pigmentation variability in KhoeSan populations is not explained by previously identified loci, suggesting that more than 50 loci (and indeed, likely far more, given our genomic heritability estimates) with a distribution of mostly small effects contribute to variation in pigmentation in the KhoeSan. This suggests that skin pigmentation is a far more complex trait than previously discussed, analogous to numerous other complex traits discussed in biomedical literature. Xyyman comment: Complex in Africans
The Evolution of Skin Pigmentation: Selection and Constraint By aggregating a large set of quantitative skin pigmentation phenotypes (n = 4,712) from globally diverse populations, we have demonstrated heteroskedasticity as a function of latitude. As observed previously, we find a strong correlation between absolute latitude and average skin pigmentation reflectance caused by melanin content. We also observe that populations with lighter skin have reduced variation within any given study: populations furthest from the equator have narrower distributions, while populations closest to the equator have wider distributions. These patterns suggest that selection is acting differently at different latitudes. In equatorial regions, strong directional selection for darker pigmentation has shifted the distribution means in some populations to Mindices >90, but with wide variances. This is consistent with a ‘‘threshold’’ model (Chaplin, 2004) in which the protective benefit of melanin needs to meet some minimum threshold but with no penalty to darker pigmentation; alternatively, diversifying selection could maintain the wide variance. In stark contrast, pigmentation in far northern European and Asian populations has been under directional selection for decreased melanin production, reflected by very narrow distributions. Xyyman comment: again, it is harder to be black….genetically
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 5, 2017 13:59:15 GMT -5
Finally, populations at intermediate latitudes have increased variance and higher means than populations in northern Eurasia, but less than equatorial populations. The most parsimonious explanation for this pattern is that stabilizing selection affects the light and dark tails of the pigmentation distribution (Barton, 1999). The Nama and zKhomani San appear to have two such instances of this intermediate variation within Africa, likely attributable to their geographic distance from the equator in far southern Africa ( 24 –29 south).
Here, we reiterate that skin pigmentation varies ***more*** in Africa than in any other continent, and we show that pigmentation in African populations cannot simply be explained by the small number of large-effect alleles ***discovered*** in Eurasians. Even in lightly to moderately pigmented KhoeSan populations, the polygenicity of skin pigmentation is much greater than in Eurasians, encompassing both known pigmentation genes as well as novel loci Xyyman comment: Intermediate is also North Africans. North Africans(Intermediate) are lighter than SSA not because of admixture. Same as KhoeSan!
It is not easy being white in Africa………..
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 6, 2017 8:38:35 GMT -5
These sisters are on the same page. Although Tishkoff is waffling a bit --- Tishkoff Quote: Many of the genes and new genetic variants we identified to be associated with skin color may NEVER have been found OUTSIDE of Africa, because they are not as highly variable," Tishkoff said. "There is so much dive Yet the same is true for some genes that ***produce light skin in Asia AND Europe***. They also originated in Africa and were carried FROM the continent by migrants
Henn Quote: (The strongest association is in SLC24A5, which is a well-known pigmentation gene (Lamason et al., 2005... including missense mutations that influence skin and eye pigmentation (Table 2), are at high frequency in the KhoeSan... these variants arose in southern Africa more than 100,000 years ago and were later selected for in Europeans after the out-of-Africa migration)
---- The strongest association is in SLC24A5, which is a well-known pigmentation gene (Lamason et al., 2005) and is among the most differentiated regions of the genome between European and African populations—indicative of strong positive selection in northern Europeans (Sturm and Duffy, 2012). We find that derived variants in SLC24A5, including missense mutations that influence skin and eye pigmentation (Table 2), are at high frequency in the KhoeSan. Notably, these variants are segregating at higher frequency than expected by** recent** European admixture **alone**. Three possible evolutionary scenarios that may explain these elevated frequencies are as follows: (1) these variants arose in southern Africa more than 100,000 years ago and were later selected for in Europeans after the out-of-Africa migration in response to northern UVR environments; (2) these variants arose in Europe and the Near East, were introduced into KhoeSan populations via ‘‘back-to-Africa’’ migration into southern Africa predating 17th century European colonialism (Pickrell et al., 2014; Uren et al., 2016) and have since been positively selected in the KhoeSan; or (3) a recurrent mutation (G to A transition at the CpG ancestral dinucleotide, a class of mutations shown to have elevated mutation rates) occurred. Considerable future work is needed to definitively disentangle these scenarios
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 6, 2017 9:00:09 GMT -5
I have being saying this for many years. 10years later these leading scientists agree with me. Tishkoff and Henn. Europeans are a subset of Africans. Light eyes and light skin found in Europeans(and Asians) originated in Africa. But They should NOT take the credit, Neither should I. Dr Mark Shriver, Rees, Mekova, Norton hinted on that many years ago when I read their papers. Henn and Tishkoff only confirmed what Shriver and company already speculated on. Don't forget Beleza. She should also take credit with her work on Cape Verdeans.
Rees/Mekova - hinted that light skin is the "natural" state of AMH using MC1R. "Removal of the constraint(UV)". In Henns new paper she is confirming Mekova/Rees was correct. There is a lot of genetic "effort" needed to stay black in Africa. It is not easy being black skinned in Africa. Shriver/Norton - hinted that AMH already had the capability for light skin BEFORE leaving Africa. He also speculated that light eyes and light skin is NOT related genetically. He was proven correct with La Brana and other ancient Europeans. Beleza - Using Cape Verdeans proved that Cape Verdean's "European" features were NOT entirely due to admixture from Portuguese Europeans. Cape Verde is just off the coast of Nigeria/West Africa. Soa Tome Prince also has the same features....it is not due to European admixture alone.
Those of you who know ES and Lioness. We went at it when she posted a chart showing Cape Verdeans carried unique haplotypes of yDNA A found only in Khoi-San. I speulated then that proves there was an ancient connection between South Africans and Cape Verdeans. Well I was right again. I am tired of being right.(smug)
|
|
|
Post by reason1234 on Dec 6, 2017 10:55:06 GMT -5
"these variants arose in Europe and the Near East, were introduced into KhoeSan populations via ‘‘back-to-Africa’’ migration into southern Africa predating 17th century European colonialism"
Yeah that one, since it's the one which fits with all the other data.
Not that anything written in these papers supports any of your strangely delusional beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 6, 2017 12:15:26 GMT -5
Ok, i will bite! Which other data it fits with? Name sources now. No BS!
Remember you cannot just simply just choose one because you "like" it. Facts and figures.
Oh! You saying that Tishkoff is wrong? He! HE! HE!
|
|
|
Post by reason1234 on Dec 6, 2017 14:41:50 GMT -5
Nothing Tishkoff wrote supports your delusional notions.
You should seek psychological help.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 6, 2017 21:21:27 GMT -5
Nothing Tishkoff wrote supports your delusional notions. You should seek psychological help. Ha! Ha! Ha! Crazy MFos ====== Tishkoff Quote: Many of the genes and new genetic variants we identified to be associated with skin color may NEVER have been found OUTSIDE of Africa, because they are not as highly variable," Tishkoff said. "There is so much dive Yet the same is true for some genes that ***produce light skin in Asia AND Europe***. They also originated in Africa and were carried FROM the continent by migrants=== copy text and google it...Stupid!
|
|
|
Post by reason1234 on Dec 7, 2017 7:13:40 GMT -5
The ancestors of non-Africans migrated out of Africa around 80-60,000 years ago, so it's not that surprising that some of the genes of non-Africans originated in Africa, is it. You moron. As Tishkoff writes: "The TMRCA of a large number of haplotypes carrying the rs7948623 (A) allele in non-Africans, associated with light pigmentation, is 60 kya, close to the inferred time of the migration of modern humans out of Africa. These results... are consistent with differential selection of alleles associated with light and dark pigmentation in Africans and non-Africans at this locus." In other words there was selection for lighter-skin genes within non-African populations after they migrated out of Africa. Then more light-skin genes evolved outside of Africa, such as SLC24A5, which originated around 30,000 years ago. This is all consistent with the theory that non-Africans got progressively lighter as they adapted to different environments and ways of life, and possibly as a result of sexual selection for lighter skin. However, the ancestors of non-Africans may already have been quite light when they were still in Africa, as Tishkoff's study indicates that the pre-migration populations in Africa may have been divided into lighter and darker groups. Tishkoff notes that her findings are also consistent with a separate out-of Africa migration by the ancestors of melanesians, australian borigines, etc. Tishkoff also writes that SLC24A5 was later introduced into African populations through back-migration, and that there was subsequent selection for this gene among African populations: "genetic evidence indicates that the light pigmentation variant at SLC24A5 was introduced into East Africa by gene flow from non-Africans” “Haplotype analysis indicates that the rs14266654 (A) variant in Africans is on the same extended haplotype background as Europeans, likely reflecting gene flow from western Eurasia over at least the past 3-9 ky.” "Further, the frequency of the rs1426654 (A) variant in eastern and southern Africans exceeds the inferred proportion of non-African ancestry… These results are consistent with selection for the rs1426654 (A) allele in African populations following introduction" science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2017/10/11/science.aan8433In conclusion, nothing in Tishkoff's work supports your bizarre delusions. You need to realise that the real problem is you're not very intelligent and you have mental problems, not that there is a grand conspiracy to hide 'the truth'.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 7, 2017 9:27:04 GMT -5
Ok. I will ASSUME you are an intelligent person and can differentiate FACT from Fiction/Inference? You keep ignoring the statements made by Henn and Tishkoff. We will discuss the timing , TMRCA later
Henn Quote: (The strongest association is in SLC24A5, which is a well-known pigmentation gene (Lamason et al., 2005... including missense mutations that influence skin and eye pigmentation (Table 2), are at high frequency in the KhoeSan... these variants *****AROSE ***** in southern Africa more than 100,000 years ago and were later selected for in Europeans after the out-of-Africa migration)
Tishkoff "Yet the same is true for some genes that ***produce light skin in Asia AND Europe***. They also originated in Africa and were carried FROM the continent by migrants" - .
So Henn is stating that SLC24A5 arose in Africa. Now, let's look at Tishkoff's statement closely based upon what YOU quoted. I will assume You have a reasonable level of intelligence....
-------------------------------------------- Reason1234 said: ----The ancestors of non-Africans migrated out of Africa around 80-60,000 years ago, so it's not that surprising that some of the genes(FOR LIGHT SKIN) of non-Africans originated in Africa, is it. You are a genius
As Tishkoff writes:
"The TMRCA of a large number of haplotypes carrying the rs7948623 (A) allele in non-Africans, associated with light pigmentation, is 60 kya, close to the inferred time of the migration of modern humans out of Africa. These results... are consistent with differential selection of alleles associated with light and dark pigmentation in Africans and non-Africans at this locus."
In other words there was selection for lighter-skin genes within non-African populations after they migrated out of Africa. Then more light-skin genes evolved outside of Africa, such as SLC24A5 XYYMAN: THAT IS A LIE!!!!!!!!!! Henn state it arose In Africa. TIshkoff has provided no proof of that. See above, which originated around 30,000 years ago.
This is all consistent with the theory that non-Africans got progressively lighter as they adapted to different environments and ways of life, and possibly as a result of sexual selection for lighter skin. Bull ish!!! It has nothing to do with sexual selection fool. It has to do with UV intensity. Further You still haven't commented on the ancestral state of SLC24A5/SLC45A2 and less variability at the locus in La Brana, Loshbour, Makrani, AIM and Bronze age Levantines or Steppes pastoralist. HA! Ha! HA! What was their genotype for SLC24A5 etc ? What was the genotype of Neanderthal at SLC24A5? Now who is delusional? That means what....4000ya - 600,000ya all humans outside Africa were black.
However, the ancestors of non-Africans may already have been quite light when they were still in AfricaBULL ish See Above, as Tishkoff's study indicates that the pre-migration populations in Africa may have been divided into lighter and darker groups Bull ish also because Late Neolithic North Africans were lighter that early Neolithic North Africans.
Tishkoff notes that her findings are also consistent with a separate out-of Africa migration by the ancestors of melanesians, australian borigines, etc. possibly but La Brana the Western European was essentially Melenesians, your point???!!
Tishkoff also writes that SLC24A5 was later introduced into African populations through back-migration, and that there was subsequent selection for this gene among African populations: she is speculating no proof of that because the locus is more variable in Africans compared to Europeans indicative of origin ...fool!!! don't you get that? That is why Henn stated light skin is NOT due to European Admixture . Don't you get that?
"genetic evidence indicates that the light pigmentation variant at SLC24A5 was introduced into East Africa by gene flow from non-Africans” where is the proof? She is piggy backing off Pagani et al. Pagani made inferences based upon FREQUENCY he did NOT analyzed the SLC24A5 locus. Smoke and mirrors on Tishkoff part. She admits all light skin genes originated in Africa except SLC24A5 but did not provide the data. Do you understand that? Henn and Beleza provided that data for SLC24A5 showing an African origin.
“Haplotype analysis indicates that the rs14266654 (A) variant in Africans is on the same extended haplotype background as Europeans, likely reflecting gene flow from western Eurasia over at least the past 3-9 ky.” FACT - yes it is on the same background. "LIKELY" means an inference based on Paganis autosomal SNP analysis NOT SLC24A5. That is why she used "likely". Yes, it is a conspiracy and prejudice and Tishkoff is part of it
"Further, the frequency of the rs1426654 (A) variant in eastern and southern Africans exceeds the inferred proportion of non-African ancestry… These results are consistent with selection for the rs1426654 (A) allele in African populations following introduction" BS. Do you understand the statement? The proportion of SLC24A5 in East and South African is higher than expected due to "back-migration"/admixture so the researcher is speculating that it was "selected". This s a lie and does not make sense because these East African populations are darker and live at same latitude as West SSA. It is a BS hypothesis. So what is the selection process? Don't tell me light skin. Lol!
science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2017/10/11/science.aan8433
In conclusion, nothing in Tishkoff's work supports your bizarre delusions. You need to realise that the real problem is you're not very intelligent and you have mental problems, not that there is a grand conspiracy to hide 'the truth'. blah blah blah. you Have nothing to debunk the FACTS I provided
---------------------------------- Xyyman comment: So in short the Tishkoff agrees with Henn that all the genes for light skin arose in Africa . But Tishkoff has reservation for SLC24A5 but did not provide the data to back that up as with Henn. But what did Tishkoff do ? she deferred to Pagani's paper which is a weak attempt at deflecting on her part. Because Pagani's paper had nothing to do with SLC24A5 but GWA/autosomal analysis to infer back-migration. That was weak on Tishkoff part. She had no proof on SLC24A5 as Henn. But she knew this was the 'key' gene. But Henn showed the locus was more variable in Africans containing the mutation, meaning it was NOT due to back-migration. Tishkoff was speaking from both sides of her mouth. In addition all population in Europe and parts of Africa carried the ANCESTRAL form of SLC24A5 4000ya!! You missed that part. So no frigging preferential "selection" was taking place.....fool!!! At least up to 4000years ago.
Hit me up ...Jah!
|
|
|
Post by reason1234 on Dec 7, 2017 11:55:12 GMT -5
Henn does not state that SLC24A5 arose in Africa you utter cretin. What she says is the following: "We find that derived variants in SLC24A5 are at high frequency in the KhoeSan, including missense mutations that influence skin and eye pigmentation (Table 2). Notably, these variants are segregating at higher frequency than expected by recent European admixture alone. Three possible evolutionary scenarios that may explain these elevated frequencies are: 1) these variants arose in southern Africa more than 100,000 years ago and were later selected for in Europeans after the out-of-Africa migration in response to northern UVR environments. Alternatively, 2) these variant arose in Europe/Near East, were introduced into KhoeSan populations via “back to Africa” migration into southern Africa predating 17th century European colonialism (Tishkoff et al., 2007; Pickrell et al., 2012; Pickrell et al., 2014; Uren et al., 2016), and have since been positively selected in the KhoeSan. Lastly, 3) a recurrent mutation (G to A transition at the CpG ancestral dinucleotide, a class of mutations shown to have elevated mutation rates) occurred. Considerable future work is needed to definitively disentangle these scenarios." www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/10/13/200139And like I said in my first comment, option (2) is the one which fits with all the other data. Tishkoff also states that this is what the genetic evidence indicates. You are a hopelessly incompetent liar. But anyway, even if SLC24A5 did originate in Africa more than 100,000 years ago, this wouldn't in any way support your bizarre and nonsensical delusions. Even if all the genetic variants for light skin originated in Africa before the out-of-Africa migration 80-60,000 years ago.... so what? This would simply mean that they were selected for within the non-African population, and non-Africans got lighter as they adapted to different environments and ways of life, and/or as a result of sexual selection. And Tishkoff does not state that all genes for light skin other than SLC24A5 originated in Africa. Sexual selection and UV intensity are linked, because UV intensity acts as a limit to sexual selection for lighter skin. As UV intensity decreases, progressively lighter skin can be selected for through sexual selection. Also, SLC24A5 did not spread only 4,000 years ago. You need to stop lying, both to yourself and to everyone else. It's not healthy. Furthermore, an absence of SLC24A5 does not result in black skin. SLC24A5 is only one of multiple genes which contribute to lighter skin, or conversely to darker skin. Tishkoff indicates that selection for lighter skin genes was already occurring 60,000 years ago in the non-African population. And the genes which actively darken skin in Africans were either deselected in certain non-African populations, or possibly not present in the first place. So your absurd claim that 'everyone was black until 4,000 years ago' is based on nothing more than your own idiocy and delusion. But to humour your stupidity for a moment - even if everyone had black skin until 4000 years ago, that wouldn't mean they were black in the sense of being black Africans. Europeans would still be Europeans and Africans would still be Africans. They would still be different populations, just with a similar skin colour. But anyway this scenario is merely a figment of your imagination and nothing more. "La Brana the Western European was essentially Melenesians" Lol no he wasn't. All the hunter gatherer samples are closest genetically to present-day Europeans, especially Northern Europeans. If anything they are even further genetically from Melanesians than present-day Europeans are. You're a truly pathetic imbecile.
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 7, 2017 14:21:18 GMT -5
Fool. Henn gave three options which includes “it arose in Africa”…100000 years ago. The other options does not make sense. That is why she spent the entire paper discussing the locus at SLC24A5 and the high diversity in Africans compared to Europeans. She is making the point that IT IS OF AFRICAN ORIGIN!!! There are always other possibilities and she shared them but this is what the GENETIC data shows that is her point!!!! What are you? A retard? Don’t you understand how this thing work?
The date of 100000ago and relation to OOA do not add up. I will explain it to you fool. Because ALL HUMANS going back 600,000years were black OUTSIDE Africa. So OOA if it is really 100,000years ago did NOT carry the mutation/derived because La Brana, Loschbour Villabruna etc ALL WERE ANCESTRAL!!! The First Appearance of the derived was in North Africans IAT. (but my personal belief is aDNA will show it is in South or Great Lakes Africans, but that is another discussion).
Reason1234 said : “But anyway, even if SLC24A5 did originate in Africa more than 100,000 years ago, this wouldn't in any way support your bizarre and nonsensical delusions”…. Yes, it would as” reason”ed above. Lol! Now you are catching on!!! Finally!
Reason1234 said “And Tishkoff does not state that all genes for light skin other than SLC24A5 originated in Africa.” Yes she did. What are you? Typical European lying to himself. SMH. I will repeat what she said. Read her quotes above.!! She singled out ONLY SLC24A5 but provide no data to debunk. She is lying.
Reason1234 said: “Sexual selection and UV intensity are linked, because UV intensity acts as a limit to sexual selection for lighter skin. As UV intensity decreases, progressively lighter skin can be selected for through sexual selection.” WT..are mumbling about. What is this? An emotional plea. Yeah, are discuss facts here bro not your delusional European fantasy about pale skin. WT…HA! hA! HA! GTFOH with that sexual selection nonsense. If you read and understood the entire paper you would understand that SLC24A5 may be of high frequency in East and South Africans but the mutation exist in very dark pigmented Africans. Other genes are at play “surpressing” the light skin. That is why I title the thread as I did. It is not easy being black in Africa. You are such an ass. You cannot pick up the nuances.
Reason123 said: “blah blah blah fair skin blah noise noise noise sexual selection for white women blah blah All humans were white OOA” But La brana Villabruna Neanderthal were exceptios. OOA were white in Reason1234 imagination because the genetics prove otherwise.
Reason1234 said “They would still be different populations, just with a similar skin colour.” I don’t understand your comment. Are you saying they are not Africans? That isi the most fugked statement I ever heard in my life. Is Malawi-Hora 8100BP Late Stone Age African an African? Where do you idiots come from? You now admit all OOA were black 4000ya!! Now you are saying that people in Africa 4000ya ago are not Africans? Clarify? You know you have lost the war before this battle began?!
Reason1234 said “ "La Brana the Western European was essentially Melenesians" All the hunter gatherer samples are closest genetically to present-day Europeans No She/he wasn’t!! Why are you arguing with me when you haven’t read the paper and looked the Supplementals. FORGET THE SOUND BITES. READ THE Fing Paper!!!! Same for KOS14 he is NOT “Euroepan” he is closest to MAkrani and Sidh NOT nodern European.i!
FYI – Just so you know Modern Europeans are 70% African in ANY unsupervised Cluster Charts. Go ask your buddies to explain what that means? SMH. Fool!
|
|
|
Post by djoser-xyyman on Dec 7, 2017 14:42:46 GMT -5
For the newbies this is from The La Brana paper
Quote: ” Analysis of this genome in the context of other ancient samples suggests the existence of a common ancient genomic signature across western and central Eurasia from the Upper Paleolithic to the Mesolithic. The La Braña individual carries ancestral alleles in several skin pigmentation genes, suggesting that the light skin of modern Europeans was not yet ubiquitous in Mesolithic times.”
Do you want to know what they mean? They are saying that These La Brana like people existed through-out Europe and ASIA(EURASIA) from the Paleolithic to Early Neolithic. They carried SEVERAL ancestral genes for black pigmentation. What the …don’t you get about that? Light skin of modern Europeans was NOT present during the OOA or to the early Neolithic. Later studies show it was much later and closer to the Bronze Age!!!!
Again for the Newbies from LA Brana paper QUOTE: “For SNPs rs16891982, rs1426654 and rs9262 (in SLC45A2, SLC24A5 and C12orf29 respectively) for which La Braña 1 carries the ancestral allele, only two SNPs were found in LD with rs1426654 in YRI, and only one with rs9262 in CEU and YRI (Table S20). The reason is that most variants surrounding them are completely or almost completely fixed in CEU, whereas in YRI LD (r2) did not surpass the 0.8 thresholds. We analyzed a window of around 40 variants at each side of the selected SNPs and analyzed their allele frequencies in extant CEU and YRI and compared them with La Braña 1 genotypes (Figure 2). For rs16891982 and rs1426654 most neighboring SNPs that are segregating in YRI appear fixed in CEU, while La Braña 1 carries genotypes not compatible with the present European’s at many sites. On the contrary, combinations of alleles for these SNPs found in La Braña 1 can be present in the extant YRI population, which suggests that those sites with ancestral alleles are not back mutations, but that the Mesolithic sample contains partial ancestral haplotypes.”
Xyyman comment: In case you did not get it. Even La Brana is a subset of Africans. Why? Both LA Brana and Modern Europeans are FIXED but at different ends of the spectrum. Ie No variation for either La Brana and modern Europeans. Do you know what that means? It means that La Brana is incapable of becoming white!!!!! He is FIXED for Black skin. CEU is FIXED for White skin. On the other hand YRI carried the most variation and capability for BOTH black skin and white skin. Look at the Fing charts in the paper if you don’t understand that. Shhheeesh!
BTW – only one other population show that genotype and no it is not Nigerians. It is the Melenesians. Norton et al. Go read!!
|
|